[1]周秀平.学生群体的政策分类与教育治理[J].清华大学教育研究,2019,(03):84-90.
ZHOU Xiu-ping.Policy?Classification?of?Student?Groups?and?EducationGovernance[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2019,(03):84-90.
点击复制
学生群体的政策分类与教育治理
ZHOU Xiu-ping.Policy?Classification?of?Student?Groups?and?EducationGovernance[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2019,(03):84-90.
清华大学教育研究[ISSN:1001-4519/CN:11-1610/G4]
- 卷:
- 期数:
- 2019年03期
- 页码:
- 84-90
- 栏目:
- 教育组织与管理
- 出版日期:
- 2019-06-20
文章信息/Info
- Title:
- Policy?Classification?of?Student?Groups?and?EducationGovernance
- 分类号:
- G520
- 文献标志码:
- A
- 摘要:
- 对学生群体进行政策分类，匹配以相应的教育公共服务是实现教育治理的重要内容。当前我国教育政策制度关于学生群体主要遵循两种政策分类标准，即先赋性政策分类和自致性政策分类。通过中央和地方的政策文本研究，结合两所案例学校的追踪调查研究发现：尽管教育政策试图综合发挥社会群体分类视角下两类政策标准的积极功能，但先赋性政策分类对学生群体分类的影响大于自致性政策分类，并加剧了教育不公平。教师、学生的群体分类认知与政策分类的制度设计存在偏离。无论现实实践还是理论辨析，均显示了对学生群体进行政策分类的必要性，因为学生的群体差异性与教育公共服务供给的统一性、学生群体类一致性与优质教育资源的稀缺性并存。未来的教育政策创新，一是要提升自致性政策分类在教育政策中的地位，二是继续消减先赋性政策分类的层级分化作用，三是要动态调整不同政策分类标准间的位序。
- Abstract:
- Policy classification of student groups is an essential part of education governance related with arrangement of education resources. There are two types of student group classification in education policy: the primary (inborn) property and the secondary (self-causing) factors. This study analyzed central and province education policy texts and surveyed two universities as the cases. The findings show that the effect of primary property is higher than that of secondary factors, although these two policy standards are both imbedded in the policy text. The cognition and assessment of students and their parents and teachers also deviated from the aim of education policy classification. Both practical and theoretical analysis show the necessity of policy classification for student groups, because the group difference of students coexists with the uniformity of public education service, and the consistency of student groups coexists with the scarcity of high-quality education resources. Three suggestions are given to further the reform of education policy. Firstly, we need attach more importance to the secondary (self-causing) factors in the decision and adjustment of education policy. Secondly, we need to continue eliminating the effect of the inborn factors on differentiated arrangement of education resource. Finally, it is necessary to dynamically adjust the position order of different student group policy classification standards along with the status of education and social development.
更新日期/Last Update:
2019-06-20